I don't use XForwarding, I just keep the database file on a server accessible over SSH and Revelation can access it over SSH. But, XForwarding would work great if you needed to access it from a machine that didn't have revelation installed.
I am one of the community editors for this book. My name is listed in the acknowledgments.
First let me say that the book is awesome. It's got a great plot, great characters, and it pulls you in. A few times I was late to work by a few minutes because I just couldn't put the book down until I finished the chapter I was reading. I highly recommend it.
Now, let me explain how I helped edit the book. I can't speak for the other editors, but this is how I got involved. I decided I was going to read the book, so I downloaded it and started reading. I find that I'm pretty good at finding typos and grammatical errors in books. I find them in books that are published by the big publishers & authors all the time. I usually find at least one or two mistakes in every book I read. When I was reading thicker than blood I just started keeping track of everything that I knew was misspelled or grammatically incorrect and everything that I was unsure of as well. When I had finished the book I found that I had nearly 200 edits, so I sent them over to the author. He was very grateful and a few months later he sent me a printed copy of his book.
So, the 'nd' doesn't really apply because I never made a derivative work, I just sent him a patch that was human-readable-only. The changes that I made are so small that copyright doesn't apply to my changes. I mean, I would assign him the copyright if it did matter, but such a small change would not trigger copyright. If I had rewritten a few paragraphs or added any real substance it may have, but fixing typos and making sure apostrophes are placed correctly does not deserve any attention from copyright. These are the contributions that I made and I can not speak for other editors.
Again, I can't recommend the book enough. I can't wait for the sequel.
I really hate this popular Slashdot myth that viruses only exist because OSes are designed improperly. No, wrong.... There isn't an OS level defense for this short of an Orwellian trusted computing scheme. If I sent you a version of Apache with malicious code in it and you installed it as root, I could do whatever I wanted. Doesn't matter how secure your OS is, you gave it the permissions it needs.
</snip>
This is why SELinux and App Armor exist. With a proper SELinux or App Armor setup you could install Apache as root and all it will be allowed to do is what Apache does normally. So, it would only be allowed to read the/etc/httpd directory and the/var/www directory. It would only be able to write to the/var/log/httpd directory and listen on port 80 and 443. So, this could prevent an exploit in Apache from taking over the rest of your system.
Admittedly this example wouldn't help a desktop user. But, there is no reason why SELinux or App Armor couldn't help a desktop user. One example would be if Firefox was locked down to only allow downloads to the ~/Downloads directory or something like that. Now any hole in firefox would only be able to damage your ~/Downloads directory and presumably your firefox cache directory or something. It wouldn't be able to delete ~/Pictures and ~/Music. The browser example is kind of complicated because it has so many tasks these days. But, the point is that you can prevent a lot of problems by employing some kind of mandatory access control system.
Oh, and it really isn't that hard to use one of these systems either. Yeah, they can be pretty nasty if you really get into it (especially SELinux). But, for a desktop user there really isn't anything to worry about. I use Fedora Core 5 at work and at home and I've kept SELinux enabled on both systems. App Armor is really nice to use for the purposes of locking down a server system in this way. SELinux is more generic but it is much more complex than App Armor.
I haven't read the iTMS EULA, but it's probably the case that burning a song to CD and then ripping the resulting CD is not allowed by it. Besides, is this really the process that you want to go through in order to make a personal backup copy of your music? Is this what you would expect the average consumer to go through?
I know every bookstore and video store is selling encrypted DVDs (and they are inconvenient being as I can't play them legally on Linux and that is all that I run). This protest was targetted at Apple, and there will be others targetted other places. I guess that's all I can say about this. Apple is the largest single purveyor of DRM so we started there.
I thought people were going to misread the sentence that I wrote which reads: "How cool would it be if there was a law that said it was illegal to create a copy protection mechanism that offered the copyright holder more rights than the law did." That is why I made it very explicit. Every word that I wrote in that sentence is important to the message and you left a lot of them out in your interpretation of it. Encrypting a personal document on your own computer doesn't even touch copyright law, so it is entirely out of scope in this conversation. Basically, I don't think media companies should be able to effectively expand the law by technological means. Copyright law gives certain rights to the general public and to consumers of copyrighted works and the copyright holders are infringing upon those rights. That's really all that I was trying to say. Believe me when I say that I sincerely value my right to encrypt whatever I want. That is a separate issue entirely.
Re:We're sending a message to consumers not to App
on
Protesting Apple's DRM
·
· Score: 1
Protests are always about getting attention. The whole point is to get your message heard. Your reply has a few logic errors in it. One, I'm not acting like a _corporate_ whore because this I'm not catering to a corporation. Maybe I'm acting like a media whore or something, but that's the point. And, I _do_ care about the real issues because I'm trying to get attention brought to them. It's not like Apple is going to rip DRM out of their products because a dozen guys in haz-mat suits walked past their store. They would only remove it if customers demanded products without it. It's a long shot, but trying something is better than sitting around in my undies eating cheez doodles, right?
Not all music is licensed the way the RIAA licenses their music.
And yes, some it is quite good - easily better than mainstream pop.
We're sending a message to consumers not to Apple
on
Protesting Apple's DRM
·
· Score: 1, Informative
The bigger problem with this whole DRM mess is that consumers don't really understand what they're buying. They don't understand that Apple controls everything about what they can do with the content that they're buying. They don't know that they're giving up rights that they have always had in order to get music on to their iPod.
To answer the poster who said that this protest is misdirected and that it should be targetting the RIAA, if the RIAA had stores set up in malls that gather lots of foot traffic we might be targetting them as well. But like I said, it's not really about telling Apple that the process stinks, it's about telling consumers. This of course means that the main goal is to have the protest picked up by some mainstream media outlets (even small local newspapers and such).
The real problem is that the situation we have now is one where the law didn't fit the needs of big-media, so they made the technology work the way they wanted __in spite of the law__.
How cool would it be if there was a law that said it was illegal to create a copy protection mechanism that offered the copyright holder more rights than the law did. Since such a law will probably never exist the market is our only chance to change how the system works and that involves informing consumers.
It's still in very early stages of development, but already indexes many more files than Google Desktop does, such as media files (mp3, ogg, movies), pictures (jpeg exif data), pdf documents, etc. Plus, beagle has live queries. This means that if you perform a search for 'slashdot' a bunch of things will show up in the results - then someone you're IMing with says the word 'slashdot' and it instantly appears in the results - without researching. It's damned sweet. Beagle aims to be released before Spotlight is released with MacOS X.
Beagle will probably meet at least some of these goals. Beagle also aims to index things like your gaim-logs, browsing history, and email as well as your files. This is closely related to the dashboard project. Both projects can be retrieved from Gnome CVS.
Well, technically it isn't breaking the spec, just bending it really far. The spec actually reads that html 4.01 _should_ be served as text/html, xhtml 1.0 _should_ be served as application/xhtml+xml, xhtml 1.1 _should_not_ be served as text/html, and it is very likely that the xhtml 2.0 spec will say that xhtml _must_not_ be served as text/html. So, while the spec strongly recommends against serving xhtml as text/html, if it keeps IE rendering the page, then I'm happy.
This was all taken from Mark Pilgrim's "Dive into XML" article available here.
I am the president of a Linux Users Group and I maintain the website we have. LUGSB The site is fully XHTML1.1 and CSS2 compliant. (There are links at the bottom of the page that will validate it) For the most part support is very good. All of the layout is done with CSS. (there isn't one table on the site) A lot of it even works with NN4. But, the beauty with CSS layout and semantically correct XHTML is that it degrades really nicely. So, if someone hits my site with lynx it still renders in a very readable way with important links at the top and the data presented nicely. Try reading slashdot with lynx and having to wade through all the links that normally show up on the left side bar before you get to the articles. How annoying is that? We also serve the pages as application/xhtml+xml to mozilla and other gecko based browsers. If you send that to IE it won't work. I think it just prints out the XHTML instead of rendering it. But, if you send the same data as text/html it works fine. If only IE would support transparent PNG images. I think the best bet is drop support for Netscape 4.x. When I say drop support, I mean, make sure that the content of the site is still accessible even if NN4 users lose a little bit of the layout, it pays off with the benefits of CSS and XHTML.
This is the kind of stuff that really gets under my skin. One of the most important aspects of the kernel code is that it is Free. If it wasn't free, it wouldn't be what it is and no one would want to use it at all. Greedy bastards. Forget suing them, I'll fight them myself.
I don't understand why companies are supplying something that has zero demand from consumers. I can understand that big companies and bad bad associations (MPAA, RIAA) are also customers. But, in the home-based desktop systems market, does anyone really want this trusted computing business? Who is this for? Does AMI see customers choosing one board over another based simply on the 'feature' of trusted computing? I see myself upgrading my computer to the newest and best that it can be right _before_ this palladium flood begins and sticking with it until the end. I guess that I had better start looking.
I beg to differ. I find linux considerably easier to use than Windows in almost every aspect, especially regarding the installation of the OS. However, I don't really understand how you can just say that Linux doesn't run desktop applications. I can however understand your gripe about the inavailability of some exciting applications for Linux. However, that is why I myself keep a WindowsXP paritition. I only use it when I am forced to (I'm a student and I get some course-related applications for windows), or when something really neat comes out (Warcraft III). But, the majority of my time is spent in Linux and that is because it is the best desktop OS for me.
My idea on how to distribute music is to cut out the record company. As long as a band can come up with enough money to record the album, they can distribute it themselves. This will cut out the middleman, finally get rid of the horrific media of CD, and if they charge say a dollar or two to DL the album, they'll probably end up making more in the long run. I'm not condoning theft, merely that it's going to happen.
In 1982, Jack Valenti, the head of the Motion Picture Association of America, told a House of Representatives subcommittee that the VCR was the beginning of the end for new movies, since studios would no longer receive money from networks eager to show their films on television.
"If you are an advertiser who has paid $280,000 a minute to advertise (on television), he feels a very large pain in his stomach as well, as in his checkbook, because (the VCR) destroys the reason for free television," Valenti said. "The technology is there, and I am the one who has a belief that before the next few years, the Japanese will have built into their machines an automatic situation that kills the commercial."
You're media is going to get copied...learn to embrace it, or just get over it. I shouldn't be subjected to all of this crap. Pretty soon we'll be signing stuff just to watch a movie.
Progeny's mirror seems to have a hell of a lot of bandwidth left over. I just DLed 1.0 at 333kb/s. http://archive.progeny.com/mozilla/relea ses/mozill a1.0/
The word "Piracy" as it is used in the software industry originally was used by authors (that's right...authors) when describing the tactics of publishers who were distributing works that were not okayed by the author first. Nowadays it is used by the publisher to describe the actions of users who want to have control over content that they bought.
Wouldn't it make more sense to include something that checked the web for available updates and presented them to a sysadmin as an option or a recommended upgrade. It's silly to have something "expire" when it can just be patched or upgraded.
Anonymous they may be, but it's still collecting a unique ID. I think that using this they could collect a list of all the searches you've done, then target ads at you (by checking your IP). It may be anonymous and entirely passive, but it still shouldn't be done...regardless of the price of the browser.
This may be a reason to use konqueror, but it has nothing to do with open source or which OS is used. I'm fairly sure that this is happening with Linux versions of Netscape 6, and even if it isn't...it still has nothing to do with the OS. Oh, and just a reminder, Netscape 6 is OSS.:o)
Slashdot Mirror
I don't use XForwarding, I just keep the database file on a server accessible over SSH and Revelation can access it over SSH. But, XForwarding would work great if you needed to access it from a machine that didn't have revelation installed.
I am one of the community editors for this book. My name is listed in the acknowledgments.
First let me say that the book is awesome. It's got a great plot, great characters, and it pulls you in. A few times I was late to work by a few minutes because I just couldn't put the book down until I finished the chapter I was reading. I highly recommend it.
Now, let me explain how I helped edit the book. I can't speak for the other editors, but this is how I got involved. I decided I was going to read the book, so I downloaded it and started reading. I find that I'm pretty good at finding typos and grammatical errors in books. I find them in books that are published by the big publishers & authors all the time. I usually find at least one or two mistakes in every book I read. When I was reading thicker than blood I just started keeping track of everything that I knew was misspelled or grammatically incorrect and everything that I was unsure of as well. When I had finished the book I found that I had nearly 200 edits, so I sent them over to the author. He was very grateful and a few months later he sent me a printed copy of his book.
So, the 'nd' doesn't really apply because I never made a derivative work, I just sent him a patch that was human-readable-only. The changes that I made are so small that copyright doesn't apply to my changes. I mean, I would assign him the copyright if it did matter, but such a small change would not trigger copyright. If I had rewritten a few paragraphs or added any real substance it may have, but fixing typos and making sure apostrophes are placed correctly does not deserve any attention from copyright. These are the contributions that I made and I can not speak for other editors.
Again, I can't recommend the book enough. I can't wait for the sequel.
Mark Drago.
I really hate this popular Slashdot myth that viruses only exist because OSes are designed improperly. No, wrong.
</snip>
This is why SELinux and App Armor exist. With a proper SELinux or App Armor setup you could install Apache as root and all it will be allowed to do is what Apache does normally. So, it would only be allowed to read the
Admittedly this example wouldn't help a desktop user. But, there is no reason why SELinux or App Armor couldn't help a desktop user. One example would be if Firefox was locked down to only allow downloads to the ~/Downloads directory or something like that. Now any hole in firefox would only be able to damage your ~/Downloads directory and presumably your firefox cache directory or something. It wouldn't be able to delete ~/Pictures and ~/Music. The browser example is kind of complicated because it has so many tasks these days. But, the point is that you can prevent a lot of problems by employing some kind of mandatory access control system.
Oh, and it really isn't that hard to use one of these systems either. Yeah, they can be pretty nasty if you really get into it (especially SELinux). But, for a desktop user there really isn't anything to worry about. I use Fedora Core 5 at work and at home and I've kept SELinux enabled on both systems. App Armor is really nice to use for the purposes of locking down a server system in this way. SELinux is more generic but it is much more complex than App Armor.
I haven't read the iTMS EULA, but it's probably the case that burning a song to CD and then ripping the resulting CD is not allowed by it. Besides, is this really the process that you want to go through in order to make a personal backup copy of your music? Is this what you would expect the average consumer to go through?
I know every bookstore and video store is selling encrypted DVDs (and they are inconvenient being as I can't play them legally on Linux and that is all that I run). This protest was targetted at Apple, and there will be others targetted other places. I guess that's all I can say about this. Apple is the largest single purveyor of DRM so we started there.
I thought people were going to misread the sentence that I wrote which reads: "How cool would it be if there was a law that said it was illegal to create a copy protection mechanism that offered the copyright holder more rights than the law did." That is why I made it very explicit. Every word that I wrote in that sentence is important to the message and you left a lot of them out in your interpretation of it. Encrypting a personal document on your own computer doesn't even touch copyright law, so it is entirely out of scope in this conversation. Basically, I don't think media companies should be able to effectively expand the law by technological means. Copyright law gives certain rights to the general public and to consumers of copyrighted works and the copyright holders are infringing upon those rights. That's really all that I was trying to say. Believe me when I say that I sincerely value my right to encrypt whatever I want. That is a separate issue entirely.
Protests are always about getting attention. The whole point is to get your message heard. Your reply has a few logic errors in it. One, I'm not acting like a _corporate_ whore because this I'm not catering to a corporation. Maybe I'm acting like a media whore or something, but that's the point. And, I _do_ care about the real issues because I'm trying to get attention brought to them. It's not like Apple is going to rip DRM out of their products because a dozen guys in haz-mat suits walked past their store. They would only remove it if customers demanded products without it. It's a long shot, but trying something is better than sitting around in my undies eating cheez doodles, right?
www.creativecommons.org
Not all music is licensed the way the RIAA licenses their music.
And yes, some it is quite good - easily better than mainstream pop.
The bigger problem with this whole DRM mess is that consumers don't really understand what they're buying. They don't understand that Apple controls everything about what they can do with the content that they're buying. They don't know that they're giving up rights that they have always had in order to get music on to their iPod.
To answer the poster who said that this protest is misdirected and that it should be targetting the RIAA, if the RIAA had stores set up in malls that gather lots of foot traffic we might be targetting them as well. But like I said, it's not really about telling Apple that the process stinks, it's about telling consumers. This of course means that the main goal is to have the protest picked up by some mainstream media outlets (even small local newspapers and such).
The real problem is that the situation we have now is one where the law didn't fit the needs of big-media, so they made the technology work the way they wanted __in spite of the law__.
How cool would it be if there was a law that said it was illegal to create a copy protection mechanism that offered the copyright holder more rights than the law did. Since such a law will probably never exist the market is our only chance to change how the system works and that involves informing consumers.
Just another good beagle link:
http://www.beaglewiki.org
It's still in very early stages of development, but already indexes many more files than Google Desktop does, such as media files (mp3, ogg, movies), pictures (jpeg exif data), pdf documents, etc. Plus, beagle has live queries. This means that if you perform a search for 'slashdot' a bunch of things will show up in the results - then someone you're IMing with says the word 'slashdot' and it instantly appears in the results - without researching. It's damned sweet. Beagle aims to be released before Spotlight is released with MacOS X.
Beagle will probably meet at least some of these goals. Beagle also aims to index things like your gaim-logs, browsing history, and email as well as your files. This is closely related to the dashboard project. Both projects can be retrieved from Gnome CVS.
http://www.nat.org/beagle/
http://www.nat.org/dashboard/
I think that from now on we should refer to all spyware as Gator-ware.
vischeck.com has a tool to change the colors of websites to show what they might look like to someone who suffers from colorblindness. Here's slashdot through a colorblind eye.
There are some pictures and video available at Nature.com - http://www.nature.com/nsu/020311/020311-6.html
Well, technically it isn't breaking the spec, just bending it really far. The spec actually reads that html 4.01 _should_ be served as text/html, xhtml 1.0 _should_ be served as application/xhtml+xml, xhtml 1.1 _should_not_ be served as text/html, and it is very likely that the xhtml 2.0 spec will say that xhtml _must_not_ be served as text/html. So, while the spec strongly recommends against serving xhtml as text/html, if it keeps IE rendering the page, then I'm happy.
This was all taken from Mark Pilgrim's "Dive into XML" article available here.
I am the president of a Linux Users Group and I maintain the website we have. LUGSB The site is fully XHTML1.1 and CSS2 compliant. (There are links at the bottom of the page that will validate it) For the most part support is very good. All of the layout is done with CSS. (there isn't one table on the site) A lot of it even works with NN4. But, the beauty with CSS layout and semantically correct XHTML is that it degrades really nicely. So, if someone hits my site with lynx it still renders in a very readable way with important links at the top and the data presented nicely. Try reading slashdot with lynx and having to wade through all the links that normally show up on the left side bar before you get to the articles. How annoying is that?
We also serve the pages as application/xhtml+xml to mozilla and other gecko based browsers. If you send that to IE it won't work. I think it just prints out the XHTML instead of rendering it. But, if you send the same data as text/html it works fine. If only IE would support transparent PNG images.
I think the best bet is drop support for Netscape 4.x. When I say drop support, I mean, make sure that the content of the site is still accessible even if NN4 users lose a little bit of the layout, it pays off with the benefits of CSS and XHTML.
Just my 2 cents.
This is the kind of stuff that really gets under my skin. One of the most important aspects of the kernel code is that it is Free. If it wasn't free, it wouldn't be what it is and no one would want to use it at all. Greedy bastards. Forget suing them, I'll fight them myself.
--Mark.
I don't understand why companies are supplying something that has zero demand from consumers. I can understand that big companies and bad bad associations (MPAA, RIAA) are also customers. But, in the home-based desktop systems market, does anyone really want this trusted computing business? Who is this for? Does AMI see customers choosing one board over another based simply on the 'feature' of trusted computing? I see myself upgrading my computer to the newest and best that it can be right _before_ this palladium flood begins and sticking with it until the end. I guess that I had better start looking.
--Mark
I beg to differ. I find linux considerably easier to use than Windows in almost every aspect, especially regarding the installation of the OS. However, I don't really understand how you can just say that Linux doesn't run desktop applications. I can however understand your gripe about the inavailability of some exciting applications for Linux. However, that is why I myself keep a WindowsXP paritition. I only use it when I am forced to (I'm a student and I get some course-related applications for windows), or when something really neat comes out (Warcraft III). But, the majority of my time is spent in Linux and that is because it is the best desktop OS for me.
My idea on how to distribute music is to cut out the record company. As long as a band can come up with enough money to record the album, they can distribute it themselves. This will cut out the middleman, finally get rid of the horrific media of CD, and if they charge say a dollar or two to DL the album, they'll probably end up making more in the long run. I'm not condoning theft, merely that it's going to happen.
In 1982, Jack Valenti, the head of the Motion Picture Association of America, told a House of Representatives subcommittee that the VCR was the beginning of the end for new movies, since studios would no longer receive money from networks eager to show their films on television.
"If you are an advertiser who has paid $280,000 a minute to advertise (on television), he feels a very large pain in his stomach as well, as in his checkbook, because (the VCR) destroys the reason for free television," Valenti said. "The technology is there, and I am the one who has a belief that before the next few years, the Japanese will have built into their machines an automatic situation that kills the commercial."
He was wrong about it before...
You're media is going to get copied...learn to embrace it, or just get over it. I shouldn't be subjected to all of this crap. Pretty soon we'll be signing stuff just to watch a movie.
Progeny's mirror seems to have a hell of a lot of bandwidth left over. I just DLed 1.0 at 333kb/s.a ses/mozill a1.0/
http://archive.progeny.com/mozilla/rele
God Damn it....media companies suck.
The word "Piracy" as it is used in the software industry originally was used by authors (that's right...authors) when describing the tactics of publishers who were distributing works that were not okayed by the author first. Nowadays it is used by the publisher to describe the actions of users who want to have control over content that they bought.
Wouldn't it make more sense to include something that checked the web for available updates and presented them to a sysadmin as an option or a recommended upgrade. It's silly to have something "expire" when it can just be patched or upgraded.
Anonymous they may be, but it's still collecting a unique ID. I think that using this they could collect a list of all the searches you've done, then target ads at you (by checking your IP). It may be anonymous and entirely passive, but it still shouldn't be done...regardless of the price of the browser.
This may be a reason to use konqueror, but it has nothing to do with open source or which OS is used. I'm fairly sure that this is happening with Linux versions of Netscape 6, and even if it isn't...it still has nothing to do with the OS. Oh, and just a reminder, Netscape 6 is OSS. :o)